Partly allowed

M B Barkath Ali v. Kenchappa

Karnataka HC20 Jan 2024MFA/6715/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court enhanced the compensation awarded in a motor vehicle accident case. It increased pain and suffering and future medical expenses awards, dismissed the claim for loss of income for a government servant, and awarded interest on the enhanced amount.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of Rs.30,000/- awarded along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition.

M B Barkath Ali Vs Kenchappa — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:2847 MFA No. 6715 of 2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6715 OF 2018 (MV-I)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

M.B. BARKATH ALI S/O. BABAJAN SAB, AGE 28 YEARS, OCC; FOREST GUARD, R/O. SRINIDHI NILAYA, DOOR NO. 404/97, B BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, DAVANAGERE - 577 001

¶7

…APPELLANT

¶8

(BY SRI. R SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

KENCHAPPA

¶11

S/O. NARAYANAPPA, AGE 37 YEARS,DRIVER OF LORRY BEARING NO. KA-17/B-4566, R/O. BANUVALLI VILLAGE, Digitally signed by RAMYA D HARIHAR TALUK, Location: HIGH COURT DAVANAGERE DIST - 577 601 OF KARNATAKA

¶12

JYOTHIPRAKASH K M S/O. K H MURIGESHAPPA, 50 YEARS, OWNER OF LORRY BEARING, NO. KA-17/B-4566, R/O. 1^ST CROSS, DOOR NO. 1659/51A, KRISHNASWAMY LAYOUT, TARALABALU EXTENSION, VIDYANAGAR, DAVANAGERE - 577 001.

¶13

¶14

NC: 2024:KHC:2847 MFA No. 6715 of 2018

¶15

3. THE MANAGER

¶16

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD, BRANCH OFFICE NO. 289/12, 2^ND FLOOR, A M ARCADE, NEAR VIDHYARATHI BHAVAN, C.G. HOSPITAL ROAD, DAVANAGERE - 577 001.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SMT. PADMA.S. UTTUR ADVOCATE FOR R3; R1 AND R2 NOTICE D/W V/O DATED 02.01.2024)

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.02.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.870/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND V ADDITIONAL MACT, DAVANAGERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶20

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

This appeal is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge & V Addl. MACT, Davanagere, by judgment and award dated 15.02.2018 passed in MVC No.870/2016.

¶23

The factum of accident, injuries sustained by the claimant and coverage of insurance are not in dispute.

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:2847 MFA No. 6715 of 2018

¶25

Heard the arguments of both sides and perused

¶26

the materials on record.

¶27

The Tribunal has awarded compensation under

¶28

various heads as follows:

¶29

Sl.	Particulars	Amount in Rs.
No.
1	Pain and suffering	60,000/-
2	Loss of income during laid up period	24,000/-
3	Medical bills	1,22,578/-
4	Loss of amenities conveyance food and nourishment and attendant	40,000/-
5	Future medical expenses	15,000/-
	Total	2,61,578/-

¶30

The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.60,000/- towards pain and suffering, which is on lesser side and needs enhancement. Therefore, compensation of Rs.75,000/- is awarded for the injuries, pain and suffering.

¶31

Based on the medical bills produced by the claimant, the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.1,22,578/-, which is just and correct. Hence, same is kept intact.

¶32

¶33

NC: 2024:KHC:2847 MFA No. 6715 of 2018

¶34

The Tribunal has awarded compensation of

¶35

Rs.40,000/- towards incidental charges, which is just and proper. Hence, same is kept intact.

¶36

The claimant is a Forest guard and being a government servant the claimant has continued in the same job without any demotion. Therefore, there is no need of awarding compensation under the head ‘loss of income due to disability’ and as such, no compensation is awarded under this head.

¶37

The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.15,000/-, which is on lesser side and needs enhancement. Therefore compensation of Rs.30,000/- is awarded under the head ‘future medical expenses’.

¶38

The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.24,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period, which is just and proper. Hence, same is kept intact.

¶39

Thus, claimant is entitled to compensation under various heads as follows:

¶40

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:2847 MFA No. 6715 of 2018

¶41

Sl. No.	Particulars	Awarded by Tribunal	Awarded by this Court
1	Pain and suffering	60,000/-	75,000/-
2	Loss of income during laid up period	24,000/-	24,000/-
3	Medical bills	1,22,578/-	1,22,578/-
4	Loss of amenities conveyance food and nourishment and attendant	40,000/-	40,000/-
5	Future medical expenses	15,000/-	30,000/-
	Total	2,61,578/-	2,91,578/-

¶42

The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.2,61,578/-, but the appellant/claimant is entitled to total compensation of Rs.2,91,578/-. Hence, the appellant/claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.30,000/- (Rs.2,91,578/- - Rs.2,61,578/-). Therefore, the appellant/claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.30,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal.

¶43

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶44

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:2847 MFA No. 6715 of 2018

¶45

ORDER

¶46

i. Appeal is allowed-in-part .

¶47

ii. The impugned judgment and award dated 15.02.2018 passed by the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge & V Addl. MACT, Davanagere, in MVC No.870/2016, is modified to the extent that the appellant/claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.30,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal.

¶48

iii. No order as to costs.

¶49

iv. Registry is directed to transmit the TCR along with copy of this order to the Tribunal forthwith.

¶50

v. Draw award accordingly.

¶51

Sd/JUDGE

¶52

¶53

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17

M B Barkath Ali v. Kenchappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M B Barkath Ali v. Kenchappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr Abdul Manan Saheb Vs Mr Ashok Sapalya

M N Kantharaju Vs Renuka M S

Smt. Susheela Vs Sri.v.T.Babureddy

Shankarappa v Vs Radhakrishna

Smt Lakshmamma Vs Sri Jayamma

Sri H L Padmaraju Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer